USD $258.00
Search Results
Author:
This book comprehensively covers the entire scope of conflicting rights and duties of the fighting parties and international humanitarian relief actors in non-international armed conflicts, namely from the moment of the initiation of international humanitarian relief actions till their authorisation and throughout the consecutive stages of the delivery of relief. From the practice of frontline humanitarian negotiations, this book reconceptualizes how those rights and duties are coming into being and how compliance with agreements on humanitarian access and other international humanitarian law and international human rights norms can be ensured and/or their normativity can be strengthened.
Author:
This book comprehensively covers the entire scope of conflicting rights and duties of the fighting parties and international humanitarian relief actors in non-international armed conflicts, namely from the moment of the initiation of international humanitarian relief actions till their authorisation and throughout the consecutive stages of the delivery of relief. From the practice of frontline humanitarian negotiations, this book reconceptualizes how those rights and duties are coming into being and how compliance with agreements on humanitarian access and other international humanitarian law and international human rights norms can be ensured and/or their normativity can be strengthened.
Author:
Global Governance, Conflict and China sheds a unique perspective on China’s normative behaviour in the realm of collective security, peacekeeping, arms control, the war on terror and post-conflict justice. This analysis engages with an Asian epistemological framework whose relational thought borrows from the context – space and time alike – that informs China’s principle-driven conduct on the international plane. Through the lens of relational governance, this work develops a new theory on the relational normativity of international law (TORNIL) that identifies the interdependent sources that underpin China’s international legal argument, i.e. norms, values and relationships. Without a fertile soil in which those conflicting relationships between share- and stakeholders can be rebuilt, international laws governing (post-conflict) violence cannot restore and maintain peace, humanity and accountability.
Author:
Global Governance, Conflict and China sheds a unique perspective on China’s normative behaviour in the realm of collective security, peacekeeping, arms control, the war on terror and post-conflict justice. This analysis engages with an Asian epistemological framework whose relational thought borrows from the context – space and time alike – that informs China’s principle-driven conduct on the international plane. Through the lens of relational governance, this work develops a new theory on the relational normativity of international law (TORNIL) that identifies the interdependent sources that underpin China’s international legal argument, i.e. norms, values and relationships. Without a fertile soil in which those conflicting relationships between share- and stakeholders can be rebuilt, international laws governing (post-conflict) violence cannot restore and maintain peace, humanity and accountability.
Author:
Abstract
Peoples have been fighting for self-determination and equality ever since the time of colonisation. The principles that inform the legitimacy of those struggles from the period of decolonisation until the present day, namely the principle of equality of peoples and of belligerents have variably received legal recognition under international and humanitarian law. Since the wars of national liberation against colonialism, the fights for internal self-determination until more recently the operationalisation of the doctrine on the Responsibility to Protect, both principles have either come closer or moved further apart. Various international legal, political, judicial and humanitarian institutions have shaped the content and interplay of these principles in response to the human suffering on the battlefield. This article will examine how competing sovereignty or community interests within distinctive political contexts have been responsible for such divergent evolution in their relationship.